New Nielsen
research fuels the debate.
Not exact matches
Insoo Hyun, an associate professor of bioethics and philosophy from Case Western Reserve University in Ohio who is not involved in the
research, explains how these two papers are
fueling the
debate.
Another
research project
fueled an ongoing
debate about which statistical method is better for examining experimental data: Bayesian statistics, which incorporates early intuition, or the classical approach, which only takes a study's collected data into account.
«
Researching Don't Even Think About It, which I see as the most important book published on climate change in the past few years, George Marshall discovered that there has not been a single proposal,
debate or even position paper on limiting fossil
fuel production put forward during international climate negotiations.
Justin Gillis has written a news article putting the paper in context with other recent
research on Antarctic dynamics and sea level, as well as with policy
debates about the current value of fossil
fuels against the momentous costs that could attend greatly expanded use:
I know your tongue is planted firmly in cheek, but I did some
research on the matter, and found that the fossil
fuel industry, automobile industry, and wal - mart - like fossil -
fuel - based mega-scale consumer goods distribution industry have many thousands of times more money at stake (~ $ 10 trillion annually) on the outcome of this
debate than do the scientists in question.
While this study does address several socio - economic factors related to climate change, it will naturally lead to more questions, and to more
research, both of which
fuel a healthy
debate.
The acrimony that has
fueled the
debate on recovered memory has abated in most arenas, clearing the way for scientific
research that has clearly established the reality of the phenomena of both false memory (FM) and accurate recovered memory.